For the media, the main attraction of the now 15 month old ‘scandal’ is the need to drive a narrative…ANY narrative

In all the potpourri of news media networks covering the day-to-day activities of President Donald Trump, the one major news network that is relatively positive about Mr. Trump as President is Fox News.

Seen largely as a – no, the – conservative leaning news network, several anchors and guest analysts are usually quite positive about President Trump and his work. However, even here there is a lot of dissent in terms of how to handle the now 15-month-old pseudo-scandal regarding the notion that the Russian Federation somehow meddled with the American nation in the 2016 election.

As has been stated countless times, this is an allegation for which there has been shown ZERO proof of effect, and ZERO proof that the campaign to elect Donald Trump colluded in any way with Russian agents, knowingly or unknowingly. (It further is often stated that collusion itself is not even a crime, so the nothing-burger here is quite large and vacuous.)

But is truth enough for even Fox to drop this silly narrative? Apparently not. Watch.

Fox News’ Shepard Smith does make an important distinction that we must acknowledge. There are two issues regarding Russia. One is election meddling, and the other is campaign collusion.

Mr. Smith correctly states that the collusion matter is the subject of one investigation, and that the meddling issue is different, and being investigated differently. Both topics tend to run together, and President Trump himself has run the two together in his tweets, which were the subject of Shepard Smith’s rather tough-sounding address.

However, it seems that it is important to stop and take a few deep breaths, maybe have a cup of good old Russian black tea… and think.

The issue of “meddling” is absolutely moot. This can be stated with absolutely no worry of having to apologize for it later.

Why is this so?

There are several reasons. First, the American people are not incapable of using their brains. The 2016 campaign was malreported by almost all media sources, including Fox News, save for the steadfast honesty of a few reporters who never wavered on their stance about Mr. Trump or anyone else. The American people were treated to a constant narrative on all networks of, at best “the two most disliked candidates in modern election history…” regarding Mr. Trump and Hillary Clinton.

But this was not true. And not only is it not true, the Hillary people as well as the Trump people had huge numbers of very ardent supporters. They still do. If it were not the case, Hillary would have crashed and burned so badly on her victimhood book tour for What Happened that she would have seen it coming herself and never taken such a bold chance. She has not disintegrated because many people love her beyond reason.

A similar (but not necessarily the same) factor operates for Mr. Trump. Now, Hillary’s appeal to her base was largely emotionally based and full of reference to identity politics as befits the Democrat Party today. She was not policy-rich, and in fact, there was no significant policy move she is remembered for campaigning on.

Candidate Trump was extremely policy-rich, releasing his list of prospective Federal court nominees, proposing the border wall in no uncertain terms, campaigning to repeal and replace Obamacare, that disastrous and expensive weight around so many American necks, and also to make a major tax cut. These policy descriptions were so powerful that many Americans who were not enthusiastic about Mr. Trump did have to admit the man had ideas they could agree with, and it was either him and some change, or her, and none.

How could Russian agencies interfere or meddle with that? With 3,000 Facebook ads?

And further, the MSM had the narrative – all across the board – for Hillary (again, including most of Fox News) and yet, due to skillful targeting, the Trump team pulled off a strong electoral victory. How does any foreign agent “meddle” in such a situation?

Further, every world power has its own set of opinions about how things should be done, and they make free use of their own resources to express those opinions, and to try to convince others to see things from their point of view. How is that wrong? How is it even something that can or should be stopped?

Apparently for American politicians and political operatives the rule is “It’s okay if I mess with you, because I know better what is good for you… but you are not allowed to mess with me…”

James Woolsey, who was interviewed by Laura Ingraham, seems completely self-assured that the USA is right and the Russians are wrong. By definition. It is worth consideration that Ingraham’s questioning “what about China?” was brushed aside by Woolsey more than anything. This suggest that Mr. Woolsey has it in for Russia at all costs.

This is a problem with many people in the US government and former government apparatus, sometimes called the “deep state.” These people seem to be functionally unaware that the Cold War and Communism are over. They also seem to be determined, as Mr. Woolsey says in his own words, to “put Russia in its place.” They also, in sometimes stunning examples of doublespeak simultaneously call Russia a Third World country and yet they act like the Russians are the most sophisticated spies and criminals on the planet.

And most of the listening public buys it at some level. That is why this talk of meddling is able to continue for fifteen months… because the narrative attracts viewers, readers, and listeners. It is not very well-played drama, but it is still drama for consumption.

The one effect it does have though, is to partially tie President Trump’s hands. Granted, he has gone much further than any conservative has in fighting fire with fire and denouncing his opponent’s lies and slander. He is very skilled at it, and in the longer run he always turns out correct. But at the same time, he is slowed down a bit from making the relationship change from a semi-hostile point of view towards Russia, based purely on nonsense and conjecture, to a cooperative stance based on the simple fact that Russia is the Great Power in the Eastern hemisphere, more so than China, and that Russia is actually trying to do right by other nations while preserving her own sovereignty.

In other words, Russia is practicing the “Trump Doctrine” in effect better than the USA is. And such a nation is a valued and valuable partner in helping things in the world. Why wouldn’t the USA want this kind of alliance?

This is the real question, and it is interesting to consider who is meddling with this process and preventing it from happening. One hint: It is sourced a lot closer to Washington, D.C. and New York than Moscow.

In further pieces, we hope to explore more of this why behind the what regarding American hysteria (mostly media and political hysteria) towards the Russian Federation. There is a clear set of reasons for this, but for now it is enough to consider that the real meddling is not coming from Russia, and the real meddling IS destructive.